Did Lindelhof take directions from McG and Michael Bay? Zero flow, zero pacing, just pop, pop, pop stuff happening now and happening in ways that made me really not care. It was more exposition and whoop well it's easier to just let the plot splat on the ground rather than tell any kind of story or build any resemblance of organic tension.

Not a story, a sequence of things happening, like watching a stream of FB updates.

The serious shame is the viral promos had more depth. You didn't get to enjoy a damn thing; it was like Scott had all these fun ideas and Lindelhof fed them to you via a baseball pitching machine.

So I watched it last night and agree with almost everything in this thread, ESPECIALLY about the Pilot not being an elephant man but that being a suit. And many thanks for those links to Honest Trailer and Plinkett.

It did suck just as they said -- and having never seen Monster, is there any ever movie that made me hate a Charlize Theron character? Wow. But I pretty much hated everyone in that movie.

So if it has not been mentioned in also suffers from "prequel has more advanced tech than original" -- David seems far more advanced than Ash, and wouldn't the folks in Alien and Aliens have loved the GPS mapping balls!?

However, I do have a half assed explanation to answer Plinkett re: the DNA....

My take is that the Engineers travel extensively through space and are responsible originally for life on earth -- they are panspermia. And/Or that well all life is DNA based because of pan spermia.

1. So do we know the original dissolving engineer created man and only man? Is it possible his DNA was the creation of all life on the planet?

2. Regardless of when he dissolved, other engineers HAD TO HAVE come to earth, because he can't dissolve one day and the next be talking to all these other humans and giving them star maps.

So the original engineer creates life on earth, and at some point another engineer or more come to earth to *warn* earth that the engineering race is now more Zeus that Prometheus and will come after earth. So those rogue engineers that came to earth give the earthlings the star map: HERE, HERE IS WHERE THE DANGER IS.

Anyway, that's my rationalization.

I would like someone to explain to me why Noomi Rapeface's panties look like Leeloo's outfit, and why they are held together with ACE Bandage clips.

And as I said upthread, the Blade Runner tie in is very lame, Roy, Zhora, Pris, Rachel, (and possibly Rick) and perhaps even Leon all seem as advanced as David and far more advanced than Ash and were about 80 to 100 years earlier.

mjbok:Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

And if you are going to tie it in why not go full prequel? Seems like that was the way it was originally written. I would have been at least a LITTLE more satisfied if the Space Jockey ended up in his suit, in his chair etc. and then a real genuine Xeno comes flying out of his chest.

My other problems with the film were already mentioned. But it was pretty to look at (at least).

Benjamin Stone:mjbok: Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

And if you are going to tie it in why not go full prequel? Seems like that was the way it was originally written. I would have been at least a LITTLE more satisfied if the Space Jockey ended up in his suit, in his chair etc. and then a real genuine Xeno comes flying out of his chest.

My other problems with the film were already mentioned. But it was pretty to look at (at least).

It's important to remember that Prometheus did not take place on the same planet as Alien(s). They are on a different ship entirely.

Also, it seems highly unlikely that any spacecraft can fall from several hundred to several thousand feet and land intact and aligned on it's axis to roll, especially a ship that is circular in shape but not a complete circle missing a huge arc.

It would almost certainly fall and squash and not roll but just break apart.

That whole rolling thing, while nice CGI, was about as stupid and dumb as has ever been presented in a science fiction movie.

RoyBatty:Also, it seems highly unlikely that any spacecraft can fall from several hundred to several thousand feet and land intact and aligned on it's axis to roll, especially a ship that is circular in shape but not a complete circle missing a huge arc.

It would almost certainly fall and squash and not roll but just break apart.

That whole rolling thing, while nice CGI, was about as stupid and dumb as has ever been presented in a science fiction movie.

"You would make a ship sail against the winds and currents by lighting a bon-fire under her deck? I have no time for such nonsense."- Napoleon, on Robert Fulton's Steamship

Irving Maimway:Zombie DJ: Irving Maimway: The lesson from Prometheus and Lost is don't let Damon Lindelof within a mile of any story you value.

You had me until there.Now I feel you just can't watch a movie with more than one plot.

He's the one who rewrote it. I hold him at 70% to blame.

Jon Spathis' script would have been worse. It was a rehash of everything that came before (crew find eggs, crew gets infected, xeno kills), and was basically already done in AvP. It would have got panned.

From what I've read, most of the redeeming qualities were changes made by Lindelof. Shaw's struggle with faith, and the focus on David were his stuff. He ripped out the overused xeno stuff, but kept the setting, and focused on the SJ's. I don't think he spent much time on the other characters, who were always to just be meatbags.

The movie might have been mixed, but the original script would have sucked. We've seen it 5 times, and one of those flicks would have been way to similar.

NeoCortex42:Benjamin Stone: mjbok: Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

And if you are going to tie it in why not go full prequel? Seems like that was the way it was originally written. I would have been at least a LITTLE more satisfied if the Space Jockey ended up in his suit, in his chair etc. and then a real genuine Xeno comes flying out of his chest.

My other problems with the film were already mentioned. But it was pretty to look at (at least).

It's important to remember that Prometheus did not take place on the same planet as Alien(s). They are on a different ship entirely.

Understood. But all it would take were a few changes in the script to get them on the same planet as Alien. I don't know. I just don't see the point of even placing this in the Alien universe at all.

And as I said upthread, the Blade Runner tie in is very lame, Roy, Zhora, Pris, Rachel, (and possibly Rick) and perhaps even Leon all seem as advanced as David and far more advanced than Ash and were about 80 to 100 years earlier.

Replicants are genetic/synthetic biology, not technology. David/Ash are machines to the core.

RoyBatty:Also, it seems highly unlikely that any spacecraft can fall from several hundred to several thousand feet and land intact and aligned on it's axis to roll, especially a ship that is circular in shape but not a complete circle missing a huge arc.

It would almost certainly fall and squash and not roll but just break apart.

That whole rolling thing, while nice CGI, was about as stupid and dumb as has ever been presented in a science fiction movie.

How about a 2,000 ton falling saucers coming in at the speed of sound (ST:Generations)

Science fiction is allowing gravity on board the ship as it travels in space and not worrying about it or marveling about the technology and science that made that possible.

Wondering how a semi-circular craft missing a good chunk of the arc it would need to be structurally intact falls several thousand feet under gravity and doesn't squash enough so that it can roll at pretty much the speed our heroine can run and not just squash flat or tip over all to build up to a several minute set piece as we worry for our heroines is not science fiction, it's just shoddy film-making.

TyrantII:Irving Maimway: Zombie DJ: Irving Maimway: The lesson from Prometheus and Lost is don't let Damon Lindelof within a mile of any story you value.

You had me until there.Now I feel you just can't watch a movie with more than one plot.

He's the one who rewrote it. I hold him at 70% to blame.

Jon Spathis' script would have been worse. It was a rehash of everything that came before (crew find eggs, crew gets infected, xeno kills), and was basically already done in AvP. It would have got panned.

From what I've read, most of the redeeming qualities were changes made by Lindelof. Shaw's struggle with faith, and the focus on David were his stuff. He ripped out the overused xeno stuff, but kept the setting, and focused on the SJ's. I don't think he spent much time on the other characters, who were always to just be meatbags.

The movie might have been mixed, but the original script would have sucked. We've seen it 5 times, and one of those flicks would have been way to similar.

The trade off is they made an aliens movie with no aliens in it, no explanations relevant to the original or its successors, and no scary content for that matter.I'm the kind of person that normally can't stand a horror movie, and even I walked out of the theater feeling like something important was sorely missing.

They should have freed themselves from the shackles of the aliens franchise if they didn't want to follow any of the old material. Just NOT make a prequel and the problem is solved.

/as it stands, Avatar was a better aliens prequel./or dances with wolves sequel...

Benjamin Stone:NeoCortex42: Benjamin Stone: mjbok: Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

And if you are going to tie it in why not go full prequel? Seems like that was the way it was originally written. I would have been at least a LITTLE more satisfied if the Space Jockey ended up in his suit, in his chair etc. and then a real genuine Xeno comes flying out of his chest.

My other problems with the film were already mentioned. But it was pretty to look at (at least).

It's important to remember that Prometheus did not take place on the same planet as Alien(s). They are on a different ship entirely.

Understood. But all it would take were a few changes in the script to get them on the same planet as Alien. I don't know. I just don't see the point of even placing this in the Alien universe at all.

The reason they wanted to make it a different planet is so that they could easily leave room for an additional 1-2 movies before connecting it directly to Alien.

TyrantII:RoyBatty: Also, it seems highly unlikely that any spacecraft can fall from several hundred to several thousand feet and land intact and aligned on it's axis to roll, especially a ship that is circular in shape but not a complete circle missing a huge arc.

It would almost certainly fall and squash and not roll but just break apart.

That whole rolling thing, while nice CGI, was about as stupid and dumb as has ever been presented in a science fiction movie.

How about a 2,000 ton falling saucers coming in at the speed of sound (ST:Generations)

/inserttechnobablehere

I forget ST:Generations, but could argue the shape of the ship being an intact filled in circle is much more likely to survive than a very hollow thin rim that is missing 10 degrees of arc. Also Star trek has some form of shields, and it's not clear that makes it to the Alien universe's ships.

I do recall people complaining of the various crash landings of star trek ships even then though, and this crash landing just seems egregiously bad and done not for any value to the plot but merely for the special effects.

<b><a href="http://www.fark.com/comments/7367818/79867230#c79867230" target="_blank">way south</a>:</b> <i>The trade off is they made an aliens movie with no aliens in it, no explanations relevant to the original or its successors, and no scary content for that matter.I'm the kind of person that normally can't stand a horror movie, and even I walked out of the theater feeling like something important was sorely missing.

They should have freed themselves from the shackles of the aliens franchise if they didn't want to follow any of the old material. Just NOT make a prequel and the problem is solved.

/as it stands, Avatar was a better aliens prequel./or dances with wolves sequel...</i>

I don't disagree, but try getting a $130 million dollar budget and final (R) cut on a "New" science fiction story; with no previous IP to fall back on be it ALIEN, books, or even a damn short story. Hate to say it, but it doesn't happen. Not at the level this movie was made at.

As for Horror, I don't think it can even be classified as Horror. More suspense/thriller IMO, with homages to the original.

I think a lot of people are made because if only gave us glimpses of what the engineers were up to, yet again. People wanted to see xenos and wanted to know why the SJ had a cargo of eggs. Prometheus teased us with possible answers, but ultimately left those answers for later while it focused on different questions and on the characterization of David and Shaw.

I'm fine with that. A good number of people are not. Like, really not.

RoyBatty:TyrantII: RoyBatty: Also, it seems highly unlikely that any spacecraft can fall from several hundred to several thousand feet and land intact and aligned on it's axis to roll, especially a ship that is circular in shape but not a complete circle missing a huge arc.

It would almost certainly fall and squash and not roll but just break apart.

That whole rolling thing, while nice CGI, was about as stupid and dumb as has ever been presented in a science fiction movie.

How about a 2,000 ton falling saucers coming in at the speed of sound (ST:Generations)

/inserttechnobablehere

I forget ST:Generations, but could argue the shape of the ship being an intact filled in circle is much more likely to survive than a very hollow thin rim that is missing 10 degrees of arc. Also Star trek has some form of shields, and it's not clear that makes it to the Alien universe's ships.

I do recall people complaining of the various crash landings of star trek ships even then though, and this crash landing just seems egregiously bad and done not for any value to the plot but merely for the special effects.

I do agree the crash was worse than the usual complaint; that they were running somewhat in a straight line. Still, I think part of the reasoning, besides being the cool FX finale, was to give a plausible explanation for how a similar ship crashed landed into it's weird position on LV-426 (ALIEN).

Shaw's placement is actually worse than Vickers, and she should also be dead. She jumps around quite a good distance when she was supposedly "rolling", and then finding herself in a safe spot. So besides the fact that people panicking do irrational things, running away or rolling to the side were both no win scenarios When you have a ship the side of a football field and more than 1/2 the width coming at you at a very quick clip.

RoyBatty:TyrantII: RoyBatty: Also, it seems highly unlikely that any spacecraft can fall from several hundred to several thousand feet and land intact and aligned on it's axis to roll, especially a ship that is circular in shape but not a complete circle missing a huge arc.

It would almost certainly fall and squash and not roll but just break apart.

That whole rolling thing, while nice CGI, was about as stupid and dumb as has ever been presented in a science fiction movie.

How about a 2,000 ton falling saucers coming in at the speed of sound (ST:Generations)

/inserttechnobablehere

I forget ST:Generations, but could argue the shape of the ship being an intact filled in circle is much more likely to survive than a very hollow thin rim that is missing 10 degrees of arc. Also Star trek has some form of shields, and it's not clear that makes it to the Alien universe's ships.

I do recall people complaining of the various crash landings of star trek ships even then though, and this crash landing just seems egregiously bad and done not for any value to the plot but merely for the special effects.

To be fair, the enterprise D's saucer also had engines and thrusters even when heading for the planet. That meant that it was at least a semi-controlled descent.

Also, the hull plating would have to be strong enough to survive particle impacts at relatively high speeds just to fly through space (assuming the warp field bubble means the ship doesn't interact normally with space debris, so, a crash landing not teraing up the saucer too badly is not totally out of the question.

TyrantII:Shaw's placement is actually worse than Vickers, and she should also be dead. She jumps around quite a good distance when she was supposedly "rolling", and then finding herself in a safe spot. So besides the fact that people panicking do irrational things, running away or rolling to the side were both no win scenarios When you have a ship the side of a football field and more than 1/2 the width coming at you at a very quick clip.

I agree with that too. Run sideways and there is a very good chance you still get splatted, I've seen how pennies drop.

My strategy would be to take cover next to a large rock outcropping then pray to my favorite deities and hope the rock outcropping can puncture a hole in the ship and protect my ass.

Science fiction is allowing gravity on board the ship as it travels in space and not worrying about it or marveling about the technology and science that made that possible.

Wondering how a semi-circular craft missing a good chunk of the arc it would need to be structurally intact falls several thousand feet under gravity and doesn't squash enough so that it can roll at pretty much the speed our heroine can run and not just squash flat or tip over all to build up to a several minute set piece as we worry for our heroines is not science fiction, it's just shoddy film-making.

The substructure of the universe regresses infinitely towards smaller and smaller components. Behind atoms we find electrons, and behind electrons, quarks. Each layer unraveled reveals new secrets, but also new mysteries.

Science fiction is allowing gravity on board the ship as it travels in space and not worrying about it or marveling about the technology and science that made that possible.

Wondering how a semi-circular craft missing a good chunk of the arc it would need to be structurally intact falls several thousand feet under gravity and doesn't squash enough so that it can roll at pretty much the speed our heroine can run and not just squash flat or tip over all to build up to a several minute set piece as we worry for our heroines is not science fiction, it's just shoddy film-making.

The substructure of the universe regresses infinitely towards smaller and smaller components. Behind atoms we find electrons, and behind electrons, quarks. Each layer unraveled reveals new secrets, but also new mysteries.

Academician Prokhor Zakharov, "For I Have Tasted the Fruit"

I'll continue to quote science fictions games until you understand.

Then I shall have to bow out out of graciousness, my professors long ago realized that my process towards understanding might best be examined with Zeno's paradox.

Trocadero:I agree w/ that, but there's no farking way the studio would've given anything over $10K and a camera phone to make it. You had to pitch the Alien prequel part to get that sweet, sweet financing.

And it still didn't do (exceptionally) well domestically.

I love how the BR release ads mirror the L O S T final season ads: Questions will be answered. No, they won't.

The movie almost felt like the Alien connection was shoe horned in. Give the engineer a different looking ship and change the last ten minutes and there is no connection and it's a better movie IMHO. Still not a great movie, but a better movie.

I remember being disappointed seeing Alien3 in the theater. Much more disappointed in this movie, since I had higher expectations.

The film was ridiculously easy to understand. In the future, space travel is very risky, so they only send people with Down syndrome or other mental retardation on the exploratory missions. What's so difficult to comprehend about that?

It was the scene where they reanimated the space jockey head that made me realize I was watching an awful film. Up until that point, it wasn't yet terrible - I was waiting for the plot to pick up.

They find a disembodied head. A gizmo tells them that the head is 2,000 years old. Naturally, they take it back to the ship and decide to stab it's brain with an electrode in order to attempt to reanimate it, which is a baffling decision. Of course! Why didn't we think about doing that with King Tut's corpse? Being a movie, it works, of course. The head wakes up, screams, and explodes.

It was such a bizarre scene that I remember saying 'what the fark?' out loud in the theater. Who would think you could reanimate a 2,000 year old head with electricity? Even if you could, why would you attempt to bother? The head isn't connected to, you know, a heart, or lungs. All the blood would have seeped out of the veins, even assuming that the head was somehow magically preserved from breaking down or being mummified at some point over the previous 2,000 years. What did they hope to accomplish?

Of course, the scene merely existed to show that the jockey was in the process of being bio-farked when he died, hence why the head exploded after re-animation. That's a sign of terrible writing, of course. They have characters make bizarre decisions and do impossible things just so you can get to the next scene.

That one scene exemplifies the entire film. Decisions are not made because anyone would ever really make them - they're made just as an excuse to get to that next scene, however illogical they are. This movie was fueled by writer's block and cocaine.

The movie almost felt like the Alien connection was shoe horned in. Give the engineer a different looking ship and change the last ten minutes and there is no connection and it's a better movie IMHO. Still not a great movie, but a better movie.

Which is ironic, because they _started_ with an Alien prequel and apparently this whole other story grew out of it. I agree with you, they should have _kept going_. The only proto facehugger we should have seen was the liquid alien that melted the geologist's helmet.

I remember being disappointed seeing Alien3 in the theater. Much more disappointed in this movie, since I had higher expectations.

Alien 3 was doomed the minute they ditched the original "on Earth, everyone can hear you scream" tagline. Plus that whole movie was a clusterfark of the studio taking control, re-writes, re-shoots, you name it, and even after all that it's a bunch of anonymous bald dudes running around for over half the movie.

One thing that could have redeemed the movie is if they showed them placing the Craig's List add they obviously used to get all the expedition's scientists.

WANTED: Biologist for long term space mission of exploration. Willing to trade your skills for a paper clip. Must know an organic material (is has carbon as part of its composure) and the kind of farming that doesn't use pesticides.

Need Geologist to explore alien world. Must supply own mapping equipment. Must know how to release laser balls, map reading skills nice but not priority. Also need super talked-up President of evil corporation to give lackluster performance and to appear (through work and method) absolutely incidental to anything else that's going on.

Remember when things that were taking place in science fiction were hard? Filled with risk? Certainty and outcomes not guaranteed?

We see this in the first film. The equipment doesn't work right, they seriously fark up the scout ship when they land, there's an overall pervading sense of taking risks with a serious possibility of very bad consequences. It felt like being stuck in the middle of space.

With this film nah. Hey! Let's land! No problems. Oh wow! There's the landing site we should choose! I'll just boop these random buttons on the wall and yow! Hey! I opened these doors / powered up the inner sanctum! Man, I sure could use this thing out of my belly! Damn! It even holds it for me at the end!

Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING felt like it was dangerous, nothing felt real in any sense of the word. To quote Samwise from above, "It was a film fueled by writers block and cocaine".

Also, the clusterfark of an ending given to LOST makes a hell of a lot more sense now. @*()*#@ Lindelhof is a farking hack who wouldn't know how to compose and end a three note song made entirely from farts.

Znuh:Need Geologist to explore alien world. Must supply own mapping equipment. Must know how to release laser balls, map reading skills nice but not priority. Also need super talked-up President of evil corporation to give lackluster performance and to appear (through work and method) absolutely incidental to anything else that's going on.

You're right.

Guy Pearce in the faux TED Talk was 1000 x better than Guy Pearce in the actual movie.

Remember when things that were taking place in science fiction were hard? Filled with risk? Certainty and outcomes not guaranteed?

We see this in the first film. The equipment doesn't work right, they seriously fark up the scout ship when they land, there's an overall pervading sense of taking risks with a serious possibility of very bad consequences. It felt like being stuck in the middle of space.

With this film nah. Hey! Let's land! No problems. Oh wow! There's the landing site we should choose! I'll just boop these random buttons on the wall and yow! Hey! I opened these doors / powered up the inner sanctum! Man, I sure could use this thing out of my belly! Damn! It even holds it for me at the end!

Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING felt like it was dangerous, nothing felt real in any sense of the word. To quote Samwise from above, "It was a film fueled by writers block and cocaine".

Also, the clusterfark of an ending given to LOST makes a hell of a lot more sense now. @*()*#@ Lindelhof is a farking hack who wouldn't know how to compose and end a three note song made entirely from farts.

It felt all wrong I agree.

The scientists behaved like kids hitting the waves with their jet skis. I think they were afraid that letting the technical parts get technical would be boring.

Jocundry:Here's my take...all films have plot holes. Good films make you not notice or not care about the plot holes.

Prometheus is not one of those films.

Not for me at least.

Prometheus didn't have plot holes, so much as a glossed-over bunch of crap that made no sense when you strung it all together. I can forgive plot holes. I can't forgive lazy storytelling, especially not in a picture that had that much visual potential and that much money invested in it.

Trocadero:mjbok: Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

I agree w/ that, but there's no farking way the studio would've given anything over $10K and a camera phone to make it. You had to pitch the Alien prequel part to get that sweet, sweet financing.

I disagree.

If Ridley Scott goes to the studio and says "Hey, I've been thinking of making another sci-fi movie. I haven't done one of those in a awhile. Remember how great Alien and Blade Runner were?", the studio would still give him whatever he asked for.

NeoCortex42:Trocadero: mjbok: Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

I agree w/ that, but there's no farking way the studio would've given anything over $10K and a camera phone to make it. You had to pitch the Alien prequel part to get that sweet, sweet financing.

I disagree.

If Ridley Scott goes to the studio and says "Hey, I've been thinking of making another sci-fi movie. I haven't done one of those in a awhile. Remember how great Alien and Blade Runner were?", the studio would still give him whatever he asked for.

Having just watched Prometheus last night (largely due to this thread) let's hope with the next one he pays more attention to the film school intern sitting in corner with a palm over his face through any plot discussion.

NeoCortex42:Trocadero: mjbok: Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

I agree w/ that, but there's no farking way the studio would've given anything over $10K and a camera phone to make it. You had to pitch the Alien prequel part to get that sweet, sweet financing.

I disagree.

If Ridley Scott goes to the studio and says "Hey, I've been thinking of making another sci-fi movie. I haven't done one of those in a awhile. Remember how great Alien and Blade Runner were?", the studio would still give him whatever he asked for.

Except it's Ridley Scott, so when the studio comes to him with 61,547 ideas to make the film "more commercial" he'll implement them all so that he has a shot of getting funding next time.He seriously seems to live in fear of never being able to make another movie ever again, and he doesn't seem to realize that with every cut-to-hell (Kingdom of Heaven) or just plain lazily written (Sherwood, Prometheus) film he makes he's tarnishing the legacy he SHOULD be able to make films on. The fact that Scott made this movie is probably what got most people to see it. If it had been just another Alien film it would have tanked.

I saw this in theaters, and honestly hated it more than I expected, considering I had no context to put it in. I've never seen any of the Alien films. It was all just a giant "WTF?" until the monster shows up in the last 5 minutes. In fact, I forgot this film existed 'til this thread showed up.

Animatronik:The scientists behaved like kids hitting the waves with their jet skis.

I'm so old, I remember dune buggies.

But I was thinking why are the dune buggies riding specifically in this giant dust storm kicked up by the dune bus? Why don't they ride a bit to the outside, a bit further back, or in front? How could anyone drive in that cloud of dust?

Also wondered why when they saw the storm moving in or earlier, they didn't move their damn ship a mile closer to the entrance.

(And wondered wtf the squid was eating in the medical bay that allowed it to grow from small dog size to queen alien size....)

NeoCortex42:Trocadero: mjbok: Other than things already mentioned what bothered me most is there was no reason for this to have anything to do with the Alien universe. Honestly it probably is a better movie without it.

I agree w/ that, but there's no farking way the studio would've given anything over $10K and a camera phone to make it. You had to pitch the Alien prequel part to get that sweet, sweet financing.

I disagree.

If Ridley Scott goes to the studio and says "Hey, I've been thinking of making another sci-fi movie. I haven't done one of those in a awhile. Remember how great Alien and Blade Runner were?", the studio would still give him whatever he asked for. have said "Blade Runner sucked and was a flop and even YOU can't shart out a decent "director's cut" that makes people happy and the last few movies with Aliens in them were ravaged by critics and did dismal box office. Why don't you go fark yourself?"

NeoCortex42:If Ridley Scott goes to the studio and says "Hey, I've been thinking of making another sci-fi movie. I haven't done one of those in a awhile. Remember how great Alien and Blade Runner were?", the studio would still give him whatever he asked for.

No they wouldn't, nor should they (from a business stand point). I haven't seen a movie this advertised, hyped, drilled into the public consciousness as much as this film in a long time. Despite that (and the is it/isn't it an Alien prequel faux secrecy) it didn't make it's budget back domestically. It made 126 million against a 130 million dollar budget. It made 300 million world wide, but the advertising budget for this movie had to approach (if not exceed) 100 million. The ads were constantly on every show, every network. The klaxon sound thing was effective. It's burned into my brain, and if I just hear that I know it is a Prometheus ad.

Looking at his last few movies, Robin Hood did 100/330/200 (domestic, worldwide, budget)Body of Lies 39/?/70American Gangster 130/265/100A Good Year 7/?/35Kingdom of Heaven 47/152/130Matchstick Men 37/66/?

None of those are smash hits (with the possible exception of AG)

You have to go back to Hannibal to come up with a legit smash (over 4x budget).

mjbok:Trocadero: I agree w/ that, but there's no farking way the studio would've given anything over $10K and a camera phone to make it. You had to pitch the Alien prequel part to get that sweet, sweet financing.

And it still didn't do (exceptionally) well domestically.

Luckily there's still science fictions fans overseas, and overseas is increasingly Hollywood's focus. Fox is got to be happy that they spend a good $30 million less than Trek 2009, and brought in quite a few more bengis'. Hell, and Trek was PG13!